Brumby
Major
Here's the thing Bumby. the Only Nation on earth that can knock the US from being a super power is the US. and it's a matter of Attitude if the US quits and rests on it's laurels it might as well pack up and go home.
If that is the case then the only way to keep that dominance is to keep ahead. In the Cold war that was easy. there were only two real cutting edge suppliers the US and it's Allies picked and chose who they sold to, and only released enough super cutting edge to keep there allies well supported well the russians picked and chose who they sold there cutting edge stuff to and passed off there junk to everyone else.
Today that's no longer the case. Don't invade your neighbors or I'll hit you with cruise missiles is no longer relevant if the party your trying to keep inline is capable of striking back. What we see today is something we have not seen since the days of World war 2 when even the smallest militaries stood as equals in fire power. the number of fighter makers, tank builders and naval ship builders is expanding rapidly. and some of the nations and companies are the make the deal now and maybe ask questions later types. given that a lot of these are modern to super modern rather then junk with a new paint job. In order to keep ahead the leading nations need to push the hyper modern, and that is not just for the US but any nation who has ambitions to be a Global or regional power broker and any nation that feels it needs to at least keep equilibrium against a Global or regional power.
In other words. Sixth Generation is aimed to be driven by its mission sets based on future and perceived threats it need to operate in. because the World is Changing and Insurgencies are not the only threats. because sometimes the better mouse trap is just what you need.
I am not saying the US should abdicate its leadership position in technology development. As you have noted, the world is getting increasingly complex but future solutions are not necessarily clear cut. The reality is that fighter plane development cycles are getting longer and exponentially more expensive. Getting it wrong is just not costly but strategically malfeasance. Building a better mouse trap might be a good answer but is it a better answer?
Technology is producing asymmetric threats but opportunities exist in every threat. When I see cost overruns and timeline slippages in the various programs like LCS, JSF and CVN78, I see a common issue across all these programs of self inflicted concurrency development. Builds are made when the design is 30% complete and/or with major design maturity issues. Can the US continue to build Billion dollar planes and ships in the quantities that it needs? We already know the answer from the truncated F-22 program. Reality unfortunately is a tough master. It is not business as usual if the US wants to maintain a comparative advantage.
In short I am saying, technology cuts both ways, programs can be better managed and technology application be more selective.